Our favourite OBJECTIONER at it again

I SEE OUR ELECTED OBJECTIONER HAS FOUND SOMETHING ELSE TO KEEP HIMSELF BUSY WITH



Fears as 51 new Waltham homes rejected
By Grimsby Telegraph  |  Posted: October 23, 2014

OPPOSITION:  The area of land which had been earmarked for 51 new homes, behind Waltham Fire Station. Inset, Councillor Andrew De Freitas, who led the opposition.
Digsby
IM, Email, and Social Networks in one easy to use application!
http://kvors.com/click/?s=88377&c=89569&subid=21987
OPPOSITION: The area of land which had been earmarked for 51 new homes, behind Waltham Fire Station. Inset, Councillor Andrew De Freitas, who led the opposition.


Read more: http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.....y.html#ixzz3GxvmfIw5
Follow us: @GrimsbyTel on Twitter | grimsbytel on Facebook
Read more at http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.....#dHsFj9YGV03cD25j.99

No wonder UKIP have targeted Grimsby.

This guy just comes across as a schmuck!

I bet when he drives anywhere it's "ah, I remember when this was all waste land and people living in mud huts........."

About time voters saw the light and voted him out

I can't stand him either but I don't believe in shooting the messenger.

You only have to look at the photo to see what stupidity it would be to concrete over farmland with all the extra drainage and traffic problems it would cause, just so some developer can get rich quick.

Because that's all it is, a money spinner. And I don't even know anyone who lives up there these days so I've no axe to grind at all.

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

I can't stand him either but I don't believe in shooting the messenger.

You only have to look at the photo to see what stupidity it would be to concrete over farmland with all the extra drainage and traffic problems it would cause, just so some developer can get rich quick.

Because that's all it is, a money spinner. And I don't even know anyone who lives up there these days so I've no axe to grind at all.

Any idea who the developer is?

Quoted from denni266

About time voters saw the light and voted him out

Probably my least favourite local politician ever but the people of Park Ward re-elect him time after time.....

http://planninganddevelopment......keyVal=N5GRS2LJG7N00

There seems to be a well organised campaign against the plan. Quite fun reading planning objection letters. This is what to expect if we ever get to a planning application stage for a new ground.

Quoted from denni266

About time voters saw the light and voted him out

He is up for election for May. The reason he gets in is because he does what his electors want. If we want to get the new ground there has to be a big effort to make sure your local councillors knows your views on this.

Quoted from WOZOFGRIMSBY

This guy just comes across as a schmuck!

I bet when he drives anywhere it's "ah, I remember when this was all waste land and people living in mud huts........."

......and a schmuck is?

I think if and when we get a new ground it would be fitting to name one of the stands "The Up Yours Andrew De Freitas Stand"

Quoted from rancido

......and a schmuck is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmuck_(pejorative)

Quoted from headingly_mariner

Any idea who the developer is?

Only what the GT link says. "The agent, a Mr P Strawson". It doesn't say the name of the developer. No doubt it is available somewhere.

Likely then to be the Strawsons who are pretty major developers round these parts - IIRC they did the golf club development in Waltham

http://www.grimsbydistrictbuil....._F_Strawson_Ltd.html

P Strawson probably the Paul Strawson mentioned on this web page

He should have stuck to cricket, good all rounder for Leicester and England in his day.

Quoted from Trawler

Likely then to be the Strawsons who are pretty major developers round these parts - IIRC they did the golf club development in Waltham

http://www.grimsbydistrictbuil....._F_Strawson_Ltd.html

P Strawson probably the Paul Strawson mentioned on this web page

Wasn't it the  strawson family who pulled that house down on humberston ave to give access to their field at the back, and now got planning permission for 400 houses after they gave the council 750k to repair potholes

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

I can't stand him either but I don't believe in shooting the messenger.

You only have to look at the photo to see what stupidity it would be to concrete over farmland with all the extra drainage and traffic problems it would cause, just so some developer can get rich quick.

Because that's all it is, a money spinner. And I don't even know anyone who lives up there these days so I've no axe to grind at all.

Well I live right near the fire station and I'm glad it's been rejected, the traffic up this way because of tollbar is ridiculous

Quoted from ackomariner

Well I live right near the fire station and I'm glad it's been rejected, the traffic up this way because of tollbar is ridiculous

Ah! I'll have to declare an interest now. I DO know someone who lives in the area!

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

Ah! I'll have to declare an interest now. I DO know someone who lives in the area!

Quoted from WOZOFGRIMSBY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmuck_(pejorative)

I knew but I wondered if any other posters realised what is was derived from.

The point is that the more housing developments there are on that part of NE Lincs ( Waltham/New Waltham/HoltonLeClay) then the greater will be the demand for a retail outlet/supermarket in the area ie off the Peaks Parkway.

Quoted from rancido

The point is that the more housing developments there are on that part of NE Lincs ( Waltham/New Waltham/HoltonLeClay) then the greater will be the demand for a retail outlet/supermarket in the area ie off the Peaks Parkway.

Oh great! So the area has to have houses it doesn't need, in places that are unsuitable, on good quality farmland, filling a developer's pockets, just so a supermarket might possibly think it's worth investing in a retail park that would help to build a new football stadium?

I'm not sure you would get a lot of support for that idea on the south side of town.

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

Oh great! So the area has to have houses it doesn't need, in places that are unsuitable, on good quality farmland, filling a developer's pockets, just so a supermarket might possibly think it's worth investing in a retail park that would help to build a new football stadium?

I'm not sure you would get a lot of support for that idea on the south side of town.

I feel you are missing the point. There must be a demand for housing or developers wouldn't risk advancing the cash to build them. Wherever houses are built then inevitably some developers will benefit and that is a fact of life. Whether you agree or not it seems to be a recognised fact that a/ the country needs more housing , especially affordable types and b/ one way to boost the economy is to build more houses. Obviously it is better if brownfield sites are used but it is inevitable that as towns/cities expand then some areas of farmland will get swallowed up. The expansion of suburbs creates the demand for more convenient shopping facilities. If the creation of these shopping facilities makes it easier for us to get a new ground then that is a bonus for us.

Quoted from WOZOFGRIMSBY

This guy just comes across as a schmuck!

I bet when he drives anywhere it's "ah, I remember when this was all waste land and people living in mud huts........."

Same guy that said "Ah, I remember when this was a public right of way. Until I built a house on it, ignoring local planning laws and using my contacts to get the right of way moved after I'd built it."

Quoted from rancido

I feel you are missing the point. There must be a demand for housing or developers wouldn't risk advancing the cash to build them. Wherever houses are built then inevitably some developers will benefit and that is a fact of life. Whether you agree or not it seems to be a recognised fact that a/ the country needs more housing , especially affordable types and b/ one way to boost the economy is to build more houses. Obviously it is better if brownfield sites are used but it is inevitable that as towns/cities expand then some areas of farmland will get swallowed up. The expansion of suburbs creates the demand for more convenient shopping facilities. If the creation of these shopping facilities makes it easier for us to get a new ground then that is a bonus for us.

We are getting non-footy here but there is no massive demand for new housing outside of the south east and some of the conurbations. This is spec building of the kind we got in the 80s only it was more offices then. Stick 'em up, count the cash and move on. That was fuelled by this same idea that unemployment and the economy could be fixed by building stuff. The big builds of the 50s and 60s round here happened when the town was well off, good wages on the Bank and fish factories, skippers moving to the suburbs. There isn't that money here now to drive a house buying  boom so developers are playing the game of build for rent like Scartho Top. Retail is in the same boat - we don't get Debenhams, we get a bigger Primark and it's obvious why. So even if there were more people in houses in Waltham they wouldn't bring much demand for a Sainsburys. In any case a supermarket would be mad to put money into any brand new retail development just now. Even Ramsdens is downsizing and trying to use its land more profitably.